Grudem wrote a 5,300-word essay titled “Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice.” In it, he points out that Trump has flaws but that those character flaws do not disqualify him for the presidency.

Grudem is a professor of theology and biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary.

David French, who writes for the National Review, said Grudem’s arguments eventually turned into “fantasy-land.”

Ethics and Public Policy Center Senior Fellow Peter Wehner, an ardent #neverTrump advocate, called some of Grudem's arguments "just silly."

"I'm not sure why anyone's conscience and moral judgment would compel them to vote for such a man, or defend him in the ways Grudem has," Wehner said.

"Anyone who says Donald Trump is a 'morally good choice' is, at a minimum, morally confused. Using the phrase 'a morally good choice' is a very peculiar formulation when it comes to describing Trump on anything."

Conservative philosopher and First Things contributor John Mark Reynolds said: “Donald J. Trump is not a normal presidential candidate and professor Grudem defining him as such is a failure.”

"Just as saying a kind word for Mussolini is a perpetual shame to GK Chesterton, so in the same way, advocating for Trump will tar Grudem. I beg him to retract it or he will lose the moral authority to comment on politics for the rest of his life. Trump is that bad," Reynolds added.